Dec 2, 2012 8:30am PST
for medicare beneficiaries. >> schieffer: why did you choose to basically say "we're going to stop letting congress have the ability to raise the debt ceiling." >> we are not prepared to let the threat of default on america's credit, the savings of americans, the investments of americans be held00 to the political agenda of a group of people in congress over time. as you saw last august, that was very damaging to the american people. it's not the responsible way it govern. >> schieffer: are you betting eventually the republicans will cave on the taxes? >> there's no-- there's no path to an agreement that does not involve republicans acknowledging that rates have to go up for the wealthiest americans. >> schieffer: you're saying you can't do it just by eliminating deductions and other-- >> very good question. you know, we've taken a careful look at this, and we think we should limit deduction but if you look carefully at how to do this, there is no way to raise a meaningful amount of revenue, relative to the sights of our fiscal challenges, by just limiting deductions for wealthy americans.
Dec 9, 2012 10:30am EST
to the president saying he can live with means testing medicare. he said he doesn't like it, but he can live with it. that's high on the list of things that leader macomedy has said he's got to have to have a deal. and even nancy pelosi has said, look, this is not about rates. it's about revenue. it's about getting the money we need in order to reduce these deficits. so you've got to have spending cuts and you've got to have some revenue to get this done. >> schieffer: let me ask senator simpson. the "new york times" crunched numbers for the tax inn creases for the wealthy and determined even if the rates go back up to the clinton-era rates it would only give us about a quarter of the needed revenue. so what other things can be done? what other taxes have to be raised or where do you get the money to get us to where we need to be? >> well, you go into the tax code, as i say but it's going to take too much time to do that. but there is no possibility to do this, not a single economist who talked to us in our hearings, said we can't grow our way out of this thing if we had double-digit growth
Dec 3, 2012 2:00am PST
is that these are really big issues we're trying to nail down here. this is entitlement reform, medicare, med karkd social security, the tax code. it would be lard for me to believe we could come to kumbaya over these poornz it is part of the process. it is quite amazing the way the policy makers designed this. i absolutely agree. the uncertainty is a killer. it's weighing on business investments and hiring decisions. but on the other side, if we nail this down-- and i think we will-- we will be off and running. >> both sides use the uncertainty arguments, democrats and republicans both use it. which means it has a political smell to it, which mons it doesn't work with those politicians. the worry is uncertainty only works as a motivator of political behavior when it starts biting, when you start seeing the effect of uncertainty in a bigger way. we have different timelines here. we're talking about a sort of catastrophe of going over the cliff or not, or may be a deal that happens in the weeks after we go over the cliff. there's another option which is kind of a two-part deal. they're not really getting d